Delhi High Court

47,108 judgments

Year:

EISAI CO. LTD. & ANR. v. SATISH REDDY & ANR.

06 May 2019 · J.R. MIDHA · 2019:DHC:2476

The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction to the patentee against defendants manufacturing Lorcaserin Hydrochloride Hemihydrate, holding that the basic patent covers the salt form and non-working does not bar relief.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Patent infringement Lorcaserin Pharmaceutical patent Interim injunction

Relaxo Footwears Limited v. Aqualite India Ltd. & Anr.

06 May 2019 · J.R. Midha · 2019:DHC:2477

The Delhi High Court vacated the interim injunction against defendants for alleged design infringement, holding the plaintiff's registered design lacked novelty and appeared common to trade.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Designs Act, 2000 design infringement novelty and originality interim injunction

Rajan Bery v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

06 May 2019 · J. R. Midha · 2019:DHC:2479

The Delhi High Court granted letters of administration with the Will annexed to the petitioner after validating the duly executed Will and noting withdrawal of objections by other heirs.

civil petition_allowed Will Letters of Administration Probate Testamentary Capacity

Krishan Kumar Kashyap v. The Statesman Ltd

06 May 2019 · J. R. Midha · 2019:DHC:2478

The Delhi High Court enhanced the compensation awarded for illegal termination from Rs. 2,00,000 to Rs. 5,00,000, holding that the original amount was inadequate while rejecting speculative claims unsupported by evidence.

labor appeal_allowed Significant illegal termination labour court compensation enhancement back wages

Laxmi Devi v. Chairman Delhi Development Authority

06 May 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:2475

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing DDA to allot a flat to the petitioner, holding that delay and laches cannot defeat a claim where DDA failed to communicate allotment and lost records.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Delhi Development Authority flat allotment delay and laches loss of records

Kartik Chopra v. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi and Ors.

06 May 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:2474

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking relaxation of university attendance rules on medical grounds, holding that courts cannot override statutory attendance requirements beyond prescribed limits.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant attendance requirement university ordinance condonation of attendance judicial intervention

Satyam Kumar Sah & Ors. v. Narcotic Control Bureau

06 May 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:2473

The Delhi High Court held that no prior application is required under Section 65 Indian Evidence Act to lead secondary evidence and that admissibility depends on satisfying statutory conditions, dismissing the petition challenging the Trial Court's order permitting secondary evidence.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 65 Indian Evidence Act secondary evidence admissibility of evidence Narcotic Control Bureau

Regulus Infrastructure Management v. Super Property Maintenance Pvt Ltd

06 May 2019 · Jayant Nath · 2019:DHC:2492

The Delhi High Court admitted a winding up petition against a company for unpaid dues where the respondent failed to dispute the debt or respond to statutory notice, appointing a provisional liquidator subject to conditional payment.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant winding up petition Companies Act 1956 statutory notice debt acknowledgment

State v. Ajay

06 May 2019 · Manmohan; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:2470-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of an accused in a child sexual abuse case due to material discrepancies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroborative evidence, emphasizing the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act sexual assault victim testimony benefit of doubt

Pravesh Dixit @ Tinda v. State NCT of Delhi

06 May 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:2471

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for penetrative sexual assault on a minor under the POCSO Act, affirming that consent is irrelevant and minor contradictions do not vitiate the prosecution case.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act penetrative sexual assault minor victim age proof

Amar Kumar Pandey v. State

06 May 2019 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:2472

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of Amar Kumar Pandey for rape and attempt to murder, relying on prosecutrix testimony, medical evidence, and recovery of weapon at accused's instance.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 376 IPC Section 307 IPC rape attempt to murder

Raj Kumar @ Raju v. State of NCT of Delhi

06 May 2019 · A. K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:2469

The Delhi High Court upheld conviction under Section 324 IPC for assault with a razor but modified the sentence to the period already served, considering the injuries were simple and the incident arose from matrimonial discord.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 324 IPC Section 307 IPC grievous hurt simple hurt

Shahjad Khan @ Mantu v. State of NCT of Delhi

06 May 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:2468

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a robbery and assault case, citing inconsistencies in the complainant's statements and lack of clear identification in CCTV footage.

criminal petition_allowed anticipatory bail Section 392 IPC Section 394 IPC false implication

Reliance Home Finance Limited v. Jagwati Jain and Others

06 May 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:2482

The Delhi High Court decreed a financing company's suit for recovery of loan amount against defendants who violated a status quo order by selling property and misappropriating funds, passing judgment for non-filing of written statements.

civil appeal_allowed Significant loan recovery status quo order sale deed registration non-filing of written statement

Lifestyle Equities C.V. & Ors. v. Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd. & Ors.

06 May 2019 · Jayant Nath, J. · 2019:DHC:2484

The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction restraining defendants from using a deceptively similar polo player logo mark on fragrance products, affirming protection of essential features of a composite registered trademark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement deceptive similarity composite trademark polo player device

Dr. S.P. Gupta v. Kirori Mal College

04 May 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7373
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award on the ground that the Appeal Committee was unilaterally constituted without the petitioner's written consent, violating Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 12(5) Arbitration Act unilateral appointment of arbitrator arbitral award nullity Delhi University Act

Pradeep Kumar & Ors. v. State & Anr.

03 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:2458

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 341, 354-A, 504, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and compensation paid, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement inherent jurisdiction

Surender Kumar Gupta; Ram Kishan; Ram Swaroop Singh v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

03 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:2459

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellants' applications for suspension of sentence in a criminal conspiracy and criminal breach of trust case, holding that the serious nature of offences and facts did not warrant suspension pending appeal.

criminal petition_dismissed suspension of sentence criminal conspiracy criminal breach of trust Section 120B IPC

Surender Kumar Gupta; Ram Kishan; Ram Swaroop Singh v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

03 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:2460

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellants' applications seeking suspension of their substantive sentences for offences under Sections 120B and 409 IPC, holding that the gravity of the offences and evidence did not warrant suspension.

criminal petition_dismissed criminal conspiracy Section 120B IPC criminal breach of trust Section 409 IPC

Surender Kumar Gupta; Ram Kishan; Ram Swaroop Singh v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

03 May 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:2462

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellants' applications for suspension of sentence in a criminal conspiracy and breach of trust case involving embezzlement, holding that the gravity of offences did not warrant suspension pending appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed suspension of sentence criminal conspiracy criminal breach of trust embezzlement